Keywords: Performance, Screening, Aeration Tank ... Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research,...
Transcript of Keywords: Performance, Screening, Aeration Tank ... Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research,...
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1672 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
Design & Performance Evaluation of Wastewater Treatment Plant-D at Tirumala
G.Chandrakant,P.Jaswanth,S.Teja reddy,G.Kiranmai
Abstract:- The increasing of population in pilgrimage area Tirumala near Tirupati in Chittoor District of Andhra Pradesh, observed as a result of the development of the modern societies is accompanied by concerns in the water sector, as a result of the increasing requirements for water supply and wastewater treatment. This situation justifies the evaluation of the system performance that covers protection of water resources &management.Poorly treated wastewater with high levels of pollutants caused by poor design, operation or maintenance of treatment systems creates major environmental problems, when such wastewater is discharged to surface water or on land. Considering the above stated implications an attempt has been to evaluate the performance of wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) near balaji nagar area at Tirumala (Plant-D) capacity of 3 MLD, were collected from each units (Screening & Grit chamber, Aeration tanks, Secondary Clarifier, Storage Tank) at a peak hour. Parameters analyzed for evaluation of performance of WWTP are Total Solids, Oil &Grease, Chlorides, Sulfates, Nitrates, Nitrites, COD, and BOD5@ 20° C. Tests were performed to find the fate of pollutants in WWTP. The present study shows that COD removal efficiency of WWTP was found to be 69.39% and BOD5 removal efficiency of WWTP was found to be 62.78%. The production of sludge in the treatment plant is used as a fertilizer. The treated effluent water goes to the territory treatment plant i.e., plant –D. Keywords: Performance, Screening, Aeration Tank, biological oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 LOCATION OF STUDY he increasing of population in pilgrimage area Tirumala near Tirupati in Chittoor District of
Andhra Pradesh, observed as a result of the development of the modern societies is accompanied by concerns in the water sector, as a result of the increasing requirements for water supply and wastewater treatment. This situation justifies the evaluation of the system performance that covers protection of water resources & management.
The temple (13°40′59.7″N 79°20′49.9″E) is visited by about 50,000 to 100,000 pilgrims daily (30 to 40 million people annually on average), while on special occasions and festivals, like the annual Brahmotsavam, the number of pilgrims shoots up to 500,000, making it the most-visited holy place in the world. The Tirumala Hill is 853m above sea level and is about 10.33 square miles (27 km2) in area. Total average wastewater produce in tirumala
are 10MLD.they were design four wastewater treatment plants in different areas i.e., • Sri Varimetlu (Block-A) capacity of 2MLD, • Opposite to Annaprasdham (Block-B) capacity of 3MLD, • GangammaGudi Area (Block-C) capacity of 5 (2+3)MLD, • Balaji Nagar Area (Block-D) capacity of 3MLD. From the above wastewater treatment plants. We have taken Block-D for the performance evaluation.
1.2 THE AREAS COVERED UNDER THIS BLOCK-D PLANT ARE • Pilgrim Amenity Complex I,II.III, • CRO Complex • JEO’S Office • Choultries I II,&III • Panchjanyam Rest House • Koushbham Rest House • Police Quarters • RTC Garage Area Near Balaji Nagar Area • Donor Guest House Near Balaji Nagar Area
• Part Of Employees Quartets
T IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1673 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
1.3 FLOW DIAGRAM OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT -D In this WWTP only Primary, Secondary Treatment units are present form the fig-1, effluents came from this plant goes for further treatment to Block-C.
SCREENING CHAMBER
AERATION TANKS
CLARIFIER
STABILIZATION TANK
BLOCK C
SLUDGE DRYING
BEDS
RAW WATER IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1674 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
Figure 1: Wastewater Treatment Plant Flow Diagram (BLOCK-D) Capacity of 3MLD.
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1675 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
1.4. EXPERIMENTAL PROCESSES IN SEWAGE TREATMENT
The degree of treatment can be determined by comparing the influent wastewater characteristics to the required effluent wastewater characteristics after reviewing the treatment objectives and applicable regulations. Although these operations and processes occur in a variety of combinations in treatment systems, it has been found advantageous to study their scientific basis separately because the principals involved do not change3.
2. CLASSIFICATION OF SEWAGE/WASTEWATER TREATMENT METHODS
2.1 PRELIMINARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Preliminary wastewater treatment is the removal of such wastewater constituents that may cause maintenance or operational problems in the treatment operations, processes, and ancillary systems. It consists solely of separating the floating materials (like dead animals, tree branches, papers, pieces of rags, wood etc.) and the heavy settle able inorganic solids. It also helps in removing the oils and greases, etc. from the sewage. This treatment reduces the BOD of the wastewater, by about 15 to 30%. Examples of preliminary operations are: • Screening and combination for the removal of debris and rags. • Grit removal for the elimination of coarse suspended matter that may cause wear or clogging of equipment and • Floatation / skimming for the removal of oil and grease.
2.2 PRIMARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT
In primary treatment, a portion of the suspended solids and organic matter is removed from the wastewater. This removal is usually accomplished by physical operations such as sedimentation in Settling Basins. The liquid effluent from primary treatment, often contains a large amount of suspended organic materials, and has a high BOD (about 60% of original). Sometimes, the preliminary as well as primary treatments are classified together, under primary treatment. The organic solids, which are separated out in the sedimentation tanks (in primary treatment), are often stabilized by anaerobic decomposition in a digestion tank or are incinerated. The
residue is used for landfills or as a soil conditioner. The principal function of primary treatment is to act as a precursor to secondary treatment.
2.3 SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Secondary treatment involves further treatment of the effluent, coming from the primary sedimentation tank and is directed principally towards the removal of biodegradable organics and suspended solids through biological decomposition of organic matter, either under aerobic or anaerobic conditions. In these biological units, bacteria will decompose the fine organic matter, to produce a clearer effluent. The treatment reactors, in which the organic matter is decomposed (oxidized) by aerobic bacteria are known as Aerobic biological units; and may consist of:
• Filters (intermittent sand filters as well as trickling filters), • Aeration tanks, with the feed of recycled activated sludge (i.e. the sludge, which is settled in secondary sedimentation tank, receiving effluents from the aeration tank), and • Oxidation ponds and aerated lagoons. Since all these aerobic units, generally make use of
primary settled sewage; they are easily classified as secondary units. The treatment reactors, in which the organic matter is destroyed and stabilized by anaerobic bacteria, are known as anaerobic biological units and may consist of: • Anaerobic lagoons, Septic tanks, Inhofe tanks, etc.
Out of these units, only anaerobic lagoons make use of primary settled sewage, and hence, only they can be classified under secondary biological units. Septic tanks and Inhofe tanks, which use raw sewage, are not classified as secondary units. The effluent from the secondary biological treatment will usually contain a little BOD (5 to 10% of the original), and may even contain several mg/L of DO. The organic solids/ sludge separated out in the primary as well as in the secondary settling tanks are disposed off by stabilizing under anaerobic conditions in a Sludge digestion tank.
2.4. TERTIARY/ ADVANCED WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND WASTEWATER RECLAMATION
Advanced wastewater treatment, also called tertiary treatment is defined as the level of treatment required beyond conventional secondary treatment to remove constituents of concern including nutrients, toxic compounds, and increased amounts of organic material and suspended solids and particularly to kill the pathogenic bacteria. In addition to the nutrient removal processes, unit operations or processes frequently employed in advanced
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1676 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
wastewater treatment are chemical coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation followed by filtration and chlorination. Less used processes include ion exchange and reverse osmosis for specific ion removal or for the reduction in dissolved solids. Tertiary treatment is generally not carried out for disposal of sewage in water, but it is carried out, while using the river stream for collecting water for re-use or for water supplies for purposes like industrial cooling and groundwater recharge
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1 PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF THE WWTPS
The methodology developed to study the performance of the WWTP is divided into the following steps:
• Identification and characterization of flows
associated to the operation of WWTP, namely: • Pollutants – Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD),
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Oil & Grease, Chlorides, Sulfates, Nitrates, Nitrites, Phosphorus;
Determination of the specific consumption indicator
and specific production for each identified parameter, by dividing the annual flow of a given parameter by the affluent flow rate, thus facilitating the comparison between treatment plants of different sizes.
The determination of the pollutant loads present in the wastewater entering and leaving the WWTP was carried out monthly, considering the monthly average flow rate and the monthly average concentration of each pollutant, being the annual value given by the sum of all monthly values.
Methods of wastewater treatment were first developed in response to the adverse conditions caused by the discharge of wastewater to the environment and the concern for public health. Further, as cities became larger; limited land was available for wastewater treatment and disposal, principally
by irrigation and intermittent filtration. Also, as populations grew, the quantity of wastewater generated rose rapidly and the deteriorating quality of this huge amount of wastewater exceeded the self-purification capacity of the streams and river bodies. Therefore, other methods of treatment were developed to accelerate the forces of nature under controlled conditions in treatment facilities of comparatively smaller size. In general from about 1900 to the early 1970s, treatment objectives were concerned with:-
(i) The removal of suspended and floatable material from wastewater, (ii) The treatment of biodegradable organics (BOD removal) and (iii) The elimination of disease-causing pathogenic micro-organisms.
3.2 SCREENING
Screening is the first unit operation used at wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). Screening removes objects such as rags, paper, plastics, and metals to prevent damage and clogging of downstream equipment, piping, and appurtenances. Some modern wastewater treatment plants use both coarse screens and fine screens.
3.2.1 DESIGN CRITERIA
Screening devices are classified based on the size of the material they remove (the screenings). The “size” of screening material refers to its diameter. Table 2 lists the correlation between screening sizes and screening device classification. In addition to screening size, other design considerations include the depth, width, and approach velocity of the channel.
TABLE 1: SCREENING DEVICES CLASSIFICATION
Screening Device Size Classification/Size Range of Screen Opening Bar Screen Manually Cleaned Coarse/25-50 mm Mechanically Cleaned Coarse/15-75 mm
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1677 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
Fine Bar or Perforated Coarse Screen (Mechanically Cleaned) Fine Bar Fine Coarse/3-12.5 mm Perforated Plate Fine Coarse/3-9.5 mm Rotary Drum Fine Coarse/3-12.5 mm Fine Screen (Mechanically Cleaned) Fixed Parabolic Fine/0.25-3.2 mm Rotary Drum Fine/0.25-3.2 mm Rotary Disk Very Fine (Micro)/0.15-0.38 mm
3.2.2 DESIGN OF BAR SCREENING: Capacity of the plant –D, Q =3MLD
=3*106*10-3m3/day =3000m3/day
=3000/24*60*60 = 0.0347m3/sec Design flow velocity V=0.3m/sec Cross-sectional area of screen channel, A= Q/V
=0.1157m2
(Cross-sectional area is increased by 50% to compensate for the obstruction posed by the bars of the grill) Adjust for the flow area blocked by the bars
= 0.1157*1.5= 0.18m2 Depth of screening, d = 1m Width of screening b= 0.18m Gap between two bars of the screen = 10mm Width of a bar = 5mm So, Number of Bar screens= 12
3.3. AERATION TANK
The aeration tanks, which are used to hold the wastewater while oxygen is mixed into it, are made of reinforced concrete and are left open to the atmosphere at the top. An oxygen source supplies the oxygen and an agitator which mixes the water so that oxygen gets dispersed evenly throughout the entire volume of water.
3.3.1. DESIGN CONSIDERATION
The items for consideration in the design of activated sludge plant are aeration tank capacity and dimensions, aeration facilities, secondary
sludge settling and recycle and excess sludge wasting.
The length of the tank depends upon the type of activated sludge plant. Except in the case of extended aeration plants and completely mixed plants, the aeration tanks are designed as long narrow channels. The width and depth of the aeration tank depends on the type of aeration equipment employed. The depth controls the aeration efficiency and usually ranges from 3 to 4.5 m. The width controls the mixing and is usually kept between 5 to 10 m. Width depth ratio should be adjusted to be between 1.2 to 2.2. The length should not be less than 30 or not ordinarily longer than 100 m
3.3.2 DESIGN OF AREATION TANK: Capacity of the plant –D, Q = 3MLD
= 3000m3/day
Empirical value, for typical Indian domestic sewage. BOD may range from 200-250mg/L. we have taken the highest value in the range: so that the STP can deal with lighter loads also
BOD in sewage =250mg/lit (Inlet)
= 0.000250kg/lit
BOD load/da =3000*0.000250*103
= 750kg/day
F/M = 0.12
The above value is taken from the available range of 0.10-0.12.the higher limit represents the worst case scenario (more food in the sewage for the bacteria existing in the aeration tank)
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1678 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
M (Biomass) = 750/0.12
= 6250 kg
We will choose to introduce a 20% safety margin
=6250*1.2
= 7500kg
Design MLSS (Level) = 3500mg/lit
= 3.5kg/m3
Aeration tank volume, V= 7500/3.5
=2142.85m3
Average Retention time, = 2142.85*24/3000
= 17.14Hrs
Provide 3 Aeration tanks,
So, each tank volume = 2142.85/3
= 714.28m3
Depth of each tank, D= 4.5m
Area of each tank, A= 158.72m2
We provide,
Breadth of each tank, B = 10m
Length of each tank, L = 16m
Size of each tank, L*B*D= 16m*10m*4.5m
3.4 CLARIFIER The next step is transferring the fluid into
the primary clarifying or settling tank. As the debris containing, and now aerated, fluid flows into the clarifying or sedimentation tanks, it is slowed down considerably to allow the remaining debris mixed in with the wastewater to separate
from the actual water. The water is dumped into the middle of the tank and flows out in the radial direction. A mechanical scraper runs on the bottom to remove all of the debris that settles, while a strip of jagged metal around the top to catch all of the floating debris (Metcalf & Eddy, Wastewater Engineering, 1972).
3.4.1. DESIGN OF CLARIFIER:
Capacity of the plant –D,Q = 3000m3/day
Assuming 24 hours of pumping in small plants. The 4 hours of down time of a worst-case scenario. in practice, pumping will be done for more than 24 hours.
Maximum hourly throughput = 3000/24 = 125m3/hr
Design overflow rate =25m3/m2/day
= 1.041m3/m2/hrs.
Cross sectional area of tank = 125/1.041
= 120.076m2
Dimensions For circular tank Diameter= 12.36m
Depth of Tank,d= 3m
Solids load =Hourly throughput*MLSS
= 125*3.5
=437.5kg/hrs.
Solids loading rate = (solids load)/ (area of tank)
=437.5/120.076
= 3.622kg/m2/hrs.
Weir length in clarifier= π* Dia
= 3.14* 12.36
= 38.81m
Weir loading rate = (sewage flow rate)/ (length of weir)
=3000/38.81
= 77.3m3/m/day
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1679 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
Volume of tank =Area * Depth
=120.76*3
=360.228 m3
Hydraulic Detention time = (Tank volume) (throughput Rate) *24hr.
=2.88 Hrs.
Compared to ideal range of 2.5-3 hours, the above results are shown within the limits
3.5. WHY SHOULD SEWAGE/WASTEWATER IS TREATED BEFORE DISPOSAL:
Sewage/Wastewater treatment involves breakdown of complex organic compounds in the wastewater into simpler compounds that are stable and nuisance-free, either physico-chemically and or by using micro-organisms (biological treatment). The adverse environmental impact of allowing untreated wastewater to be discharged in groundwater or surface water bodies and/or land is as follows -
(i) The decomposition of the organic materials contained in wastewater can lead to the production of large quantities of malodorous gases.
(ii) Untreated wastewater (sewage) containing a large amount of organic matter, if discharged into a river/stream, will consume the dissolved oxygen for satisfying the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) of wastewater and thus, deplete the dissolved oxygen of the stream; thereby, causing fish kills and other undesirable effects. (iii) Wastewater may also contain nutrients, which can stimulate the growth of aquatic plants and algal blooms; thus, leading to eutrophication of the lakes and streams.
(iv) Untreated wastewater usually contains numerous pathogenic, or disease causing microorganisms and toxic compounds, that
dwell in the human intestinal tract or may be present in certain industrial waste. These may contaminate the land or the water body, where such sewage is disposed. For the above-mentioned reasons, the treatment and disposal of wastewater, is not only desirable but also necessary
3.6 EXPERIMENTAL PROCESSES IN SEWAGE TREATMENT
The degree of treatment can be determined by comparing the influent wastewater characteristics to the required effluent wastewater characteristics after reviewing the treatment objectives and applicable regulations. Although these operations
and processes occur in a variety of combinations in treatment systems, it has been found advantageous to study their scientific basis separately because the principals involved do not change3.
4. ANALYSIS
We did grab sampling for each and every unit influent & effluents in peak hours in quality & quantity. Parameters analyzed for evaluation of performance of WWTP are Total Solids, Oil & Grease, Chlorides, Sulfates, Nitrates, Nitrites, COD, BOD5 @ 20°. The analysis report as given below Table-2
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1680 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
TABLE 2: UNIT WISE REMOVAL EFFICIENCY OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
SL No. PARAMETERS UNITS
WASTEWATER TREATMENT UNITS
SCREENING CHAMBER
AERATION TANK
SECONDARY CLARIFIER STABILIZATION TANK
1 pH Influent 7.17 7.14 7.13 7.12
Effluent 7.14 7.13 7.12 7.12 Removal efficiency % 0.42 0.14 0.14 0.00
2 TDS
Influent mg/L 200.00 400.00 210.00 0.00
Effluent mg/L 200.00 210.00 0.00 0.00
Removal efficiency % 0.00 47.50 100.00 0.00
3 TSS
Influent mg/L 2100 2200 1200 600
Effluent mg/L 1800 1200 600 600
Removal efficiency % 14.29 45.45 50 0
4 OIL & GREASE Influent mg/L 5.12 3.64 2.56 1.72
Effluent mg/L 3.64 2.56 1.72 1.72 Removal efficiency % 28.91 29.67 32.81 0.00
5 BOD 5 @ 200C
Influent mg/L 157.50 127.50 95.00 65.00 Effluent mg/L 127.50 95.00 65.00 58.62
Removal efficiency % 19.05 25.49 31.58 9.82
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1681 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
6 COD Influent mg/L 202.66 160.00 101.33 62.00
Effluent mg/L 160.00 102.00 62.00 61.85
Removal efficiency % 21.05 36.25 38.81 0.24
7 CHLORIDES Influent mg/L 99.99 99.99 109.99 89.99
Effluent mg/L 99.99 100.00 89.99 89.99
Removal efficiency % 0.00 -0.01 18.18 0.00
8 PHOSPHOROUS
Influent mg/L 15.60 15.60 4.00 3.52
Effluent mg/L 15.60 4.00 3.52 3.52
Removal efficiency % 0.00 74.36 12.00 0.00
9 SULFATES Influent mg/L 70.00 66.00 69.00 36.00
Effluent mg/L 66.00 68.00 36.00 36.00
Removal efficiency % 5.71 -3.03 47.83 0.00
10 NITRITES Influent mg/L 3.00 2.66 4.20 0.22
Effluent mg/L 2.66 4.20 0.22 0.22
Removal efficiency % 11.33 -57.89 94.76 0.00
11 NITRATES
Influent mg/L 1.24 1.32 1.60 0.00
Effluent mg/L 1.32 1.60 0.00 0.00
Removal efficiency % -6.45 -21.21 100.00 0.00
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1682 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
TABLE 3: OVERALL REMOVAL EFFICIENCY OF PARAMETERS IN BLOCK D PLANT
S.NO NAME OF THE TEST INLET
WASTEWATER (mg/L)
OUTLET WASTE WATER (mg/L)
STANDARDS IS 2296:1992
LAND FOR IRRIGATIONWA
TER (mg/L)
OVERALL REMOVAL
EFFICIENCY (%)
1 TDS 200.00 0 - 100.00
2 TSS 2100.00 600 200 71.43
3 OIL & GREASE 5.12 1.72 10 66.41
4 BOD 5 @ 200C 157.50 58.62 100 62.78
5 COD 202.60 61.85 250 69.40
6 CHLORIDES 99.99 89.99 - 10.00
7 PHOSPHOROUS 15.60 3.52 5 77.44
8 SULFATES 70.00 36 2 48.57
9 NITRITES 3.00 0.22 0 92.67
10 NITRATES 1.24 0 0 100.00
11 MLSS 1200 11
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1683 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
Figure 2: Graph of Unit wise TDS Removal
Figure 3: Graph of Unit wise TSS Removal
SCREENING CHAMBER, 200
AERATION TANK, 400
SECONDARY CLARIFIER, 210
STABILIZATION TANK, 0
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
0 1 2 3 4
mg/L
Wastewater Treatment Units
TDS
Wastewater Treatment
Units 1.SCREENING CHAMBER. 2.AERATION
TANK. 3. SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 4.STABILIZATION
TANK
SCREENING CHAMBER, 2100
AERATION TANK, 2200
SECONDARY CLARIFIER, 1200
STABILIZATION TANK, 600
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 1 2 3 4
mg/L
Wastewater Treatment Units
TSSWastewater Treatment
Units 1.SCREENING CHAMBER. 2.AERATION
TANK. 3. SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 4.STABILIZATION
TANK
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1684 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
Figure 4: Graph of Unit wise Oil & Grease Removal
Figure 5: Graph of Unit wise BOD 5 @ 20 degree Celsius Removal
SCREENING CHAMBER, 5.12
AERATION TANK, 3.64
SECONDARY CLARIFIER, 2.56
STABILIZATION TANK, 1.72
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 1 2 3 4
mg/L
Wastewater Treatment Units
OIL & GREASEWastewater Treatment
Units 1.SCREENING CHAMBER. 2.AERATION
TANK. 3. SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 4.STABILIZATION
TANK
SCREENING CHAMBER, 157.5
AERATION TANK, 127.5
SECONDARY CLARIFIER, 95
STABILIZATION TANK, 65
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
0 1 2 3 4
mg/L
Wastewater Treatment Units
BOD 5 @ 20 C
Wastewater Treatment
Units 1.SCREENING CHAMBER. 2.AERATION
TANK. 3. SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 4.STABILIZATION
TANK
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1685 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
Figure 6: Graph of Unit wise COD Removal
Figure 7: Graph of Unit wise Chlorides Removal
SCREENING CHAMBER, 202.66
AERATION TANK, 160
SECONDARY CLARIFIER, 101.33
STABILIZATION TANK, 62
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 1 2 3 4
mg/L
Wastewater Treatment Units
CODWastewater Treatment
Units 1.SCREENING CHAMBER. 2.AERATION
TANK. 3. SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 4.STABILIZATION
TANK
SCREENING CHAMBER, 99.99
AERATION TANK, 99.99
SECONDARY CLARIFIER, 109.99
STABILIZATION TANK, 89.99
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
0 1 2 3 4
mg/L
Wastewater Treatment Units
CHLORIDES
Wastewater Treatment
Units 1.SCREENING CHAMBER. 2.AERATION
TANK. 3. SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 4.STABILIZATION
TANK
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1686 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
Figure 8: Graph of Unit wise Phosphorous Removal
SCREENING CHAMBER, 15.6 AERATION TANK, 15.6
SECONDARY CLARIFIER, 4
STABILIZATION TANK, 3.52
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 1 2 3 4
mg/L
Wastewater Treatment Units
PHOSPHOROUSWastewater Treatment
Units 1.SCREENING CHAMBER. 2.AERATION
TANK. 3. SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 4.STABILIZATION
TANK
SCREENING CHAMBER, 15.6
AERATION TANK, 15.6
SECONDARY CLARIFIER, 4
STABILIZATION TANK, 3.52
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 1 2 3 4
mg/L
Wastewater Treatment Units
SULFATESWastewater Treatment
Units 1.SCREENING CHAMBER. 2.AERATION
TANK. 3. SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 4.STABILIZATION
TANK
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1687 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
Figure 9: Graph of Unit wise sulfates Removal
Figure 10: Graph of Unit wise Nitrites Removal
Figure 11: Graph of Unit wise Nitrates Removal
SCREENING CHAMBER, 3
AERATION TANK, 2.66
SECONDARY CLARIFIER, 4.2
STABILIZATION TANK, 0.22
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
0 1 2 3 4
mg/L
Wastewater Treatment Units
NITRITES
Wastewater Treatment
Units 1.SCREENING CHAMBER. 2.AERATION
TANK. 3. SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 4.STABILIZATION
TANK
SCREENING CHAMBER, 1.24
AERATION TANK, 1.32
SECONDARY CLARIFIER, 1.6
STABILIZATION TANK, 0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
0 1 2 3 4
mg/L
Wastewater Treatment Units
NITRATESWastewater Treatment
Units 1.SCREENING CHAMBER. 2.AERATION
TANK. 3. SECONDARY
CLARIFIER 4.STABILIZATION
TANK
IJSER
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 6, Issue 7, July-2015 1688 ISSN 2229-5518
IJSER © 2015 http://www.ijser.org
5. CONCLUSION Based on the Study, the following conclusions
can be drawn.
The COD removal efficiency of WWTP was found to be 62.00%.
The BOD5 removal efficiency of WWTP was found to be 58.62%.
The Total solid removal efficiency of WWTP
was found to be 73.91%. The current results suggest that the treated
effluent is complying with the standard values and can be used for irrigation.
The treated effluent water is found to meet the effluent discharge standards. In order to further improve the performance of the ETP, the following action plans are recommended. The above study recommended to following action plan for the resource recovery to make ETP sustainable for conservation of energy and water.
Based on results, we can conclude that the
Treated Wastewater is used for Eco-plantation.
REFERENCES
1. Metcalf and Eddy “Wastewater Engineering:
Treatment and Reuse”. Tata McGraw- Hill Edition,
(2003).
2. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater (English) by American Public
Association
3. Metcalf, L., & Eddy, H. P. (1930). Sewerage and
Sewage Disposal: A Textbook. New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company.
4. Metcalf, L., & Eddy, H. P. (1972). Wastewater
Engineering. New York: McGraw-Hill Book
Company.
IJSER